On June 30, 2015, the Defendant sold Masp packaging machines to the victim B in KRW 27.5 million. On April 7, 2016, the Defendant: (a) in the warehouse for the operation of the victim in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, the horse intending to sell the machines with heavy weighted from the victim; and (b) in order for the victim to sell the machines with heavy weighted from the victim; (c) on the part of the victim, the Defendant: (d) proposed to the effect that he would sell the machines on behalf of the victim; and (d) sold the said machines to D on September 30, 2016 after receiving the said machines from the victim and kept the said machines for KRW 23,00,000,000,000 for repair expenses; and (e) embezzled the machines for personal use, such as manufacturing the machinery operated by the Defendant at his own expense; and (e) made the Defendant’s arbitrary consumption of the machinery in Seoul Special Metropolitan City for its own use.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on account transactions;

1. In light of the relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts, the background and content of the crime subject to sentencing of imprisonment with prison labor, the degree of damage, the damage was not completely recovered, the victim did not agree with the victim, and the circumstances after the crime were committed are not very good until the execution of detention warrant without complying with the summons of the court even after the indictment. In light of the above, it is inevitable to sentence the Defendant on the sentence.

However, in determining the specific punishment, it seems that the crime is recognized, and the first offender is the first offender, the age, career, health status, and family relationship of the defendant, and all other circumstances favorable or unfavorable to the defendant in the arguments were considered comprehensively.